GOP state rep: Perry should reimburse Texas

AUSTIN - A lawmaker says an outcry from fellow Republicans over Gov. Rick Perry's security expenses prompted his proposal to require officeholders to reimburse taxpayers for their state-paid security if they're not doing state business.

Taxpayers have been charged $2.3 million since Perry's re-election for his security detail's travel expenses on out-of-state trips, as I've reported. More than $1.8 million of that was incurred from August 2011 through this January, during his bid for the White House.

"We literally had hundreds of pieces of correspondence, and they were all from Republicans," said state Rep. Lyle Larson, R-San Antonio. "They were Republicans saying, 'This is not right. He needs to reimburse the state for those expenses.'

"When you are in another state, and you're running for another office, I think most people would think common sense would prevail, and you would just use your campaign money and pay for that," Larson said.

Perry's direct travel costs generally are paid by his campaign or other means, not taxpayers. But expenses for his security detail are paid mainly through the state highway fund.

Besides his presidential race, the rest of the Perry out-of-state security tab has been for trips on state business, a book tour, vacation or political reasons, including campaigning for other candidates. The $2.3 million total was just through August.

Larson's House Bill 160 would require lawmakers or statewide officeholders to file a disclosure with the Texas Ethics Commission if they use state funds for travel or security outside Texas.

If the state-funded travel or security isn't for official state business, the official would have to reimburse the state, plus interest at the rate of inflation.

Larson said if he gets a hearing on his bill after state lawmakers convene Jan. 8, he may broaden it to include in-state travel. It only would apply to expenses going forward, not past bills, he said.

Perry has brushed off calls from Democrats that he reimburse Texas for the security costs for his presidential campaign. He notes he is governor wherever he goes and says the security need is determined by the Texas Department of Public Safety.

Thousands of bills

Perry spokesman Josh Havens called Larson's measure "one of thousands of bills the Legislature will address this session," saying that Perry "will review those that make it through the process and onto his desk."

Larson pointed to South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who according to a July report by the Associated Press had repaid taxpayers more than $7,700 for her security at fundraising events outside the state.

A news report also said she reimbursed her state for using state planes for bill signings and news conferences.

The stories said South Carolina law bars taxpayer money from being used for campaign events, and a budget provision restricted state-paid plane use.

"We have a general policy in the state of Texas that state funds are not used to underwrite political activity," said Fred Lewis, a lawyer who is an expert in elections and ethics.

Lewis's personal view: "The citizens of Texas should not be underwriting somebody's political campaign for president."

Larson said he has heard from colleagues who support his bill. It may not get too far, however, since legislators hoping to enact their own proposals generally aren't eager to annoy the guy with the veto pen.

Southern Methodist University political scientist Cal Jillson said its prospects are slim: "There are big Republican majorities in both the Texas House and Senate, and the presiding officers have bigger fish to fry than giving this any time, even in committee."

I asked Larson about whether it might seem odd for a Republican to push this issue, especially as Perry leaves open the door to a run for re-election in 2014 and another race for president in 2016.

"It's important that a Republican does it, because if a Democrat does it, then it looks like it's political retribution," Larson said. "I think that we need to do it, because some time in the future, there's going to be Democrats in those positions as well."